THE BUILDER FEBRUARY 1927
Effects of Anti-Masonry on the Masonic Fraternity,

1826 - 1856

BY BRO. ERIK MCKINLEY ERIKSSON, Iowa

IT is inevitable that the Masonic Institution should have been
seriously affected by the great wave of anti-Masonry which followed
Morgan's disappearance. However, during the years which have
intervened little has been done to determine just what happened to
the Fraternity, though there has been much generalizing.
Anti-Masons, even at the present time, glibly dispense the
information that organized Freemasonry was exterminated and point
to the disappearance of Masonry in Illinois as proof. They might
also point to the fact that the Grand Lodge of Michigan became
defunct for a time and that the Grand Lodge of Vermont was
practically suspended for ten years. But setting forth such facts
does not prove their contention for there were twenty-three other
Grand Lodges which did not become defunct and which did not
suspend.

Masonic historians have also failed, thus far, to make a thorough
study of the effects of anti-Masonry. They, too, have been content
with generalizations such as "[anti-Masonry] was disastrous to the
growth and progress of the Institution." What apparently happened
in a few Grand Jurisdictions has been accepted as sufficient
evidence to prove that anti-Masonry almost exterminated the Masonic
Fraternity in the United States. They have pointed to the decrease
in the number of lodges represented at the annual communications as
illustrative of the devastation wrought by the anti-Masonic
movement. But, in so doing, they have failed to consider that there
might have been other factors than anti-Masonry operating to bring
about a decline in Masonic strength during the period following the
Morgan affair.

When one studies the situation in each Grand Jurisdiction
separately he becomes convinced that anti-Masonry, though a factor
of great importance, was not by any means solely to blame for the
low state to which the Masonic Institution fell during the decade
of the thirties. In some jurisdictions Masonry was in a low state
before 1826 due to internal troubles of various kinds. In the case
of most of the Grand Lodges, the percentage of lodges represented
at the various communications before 1826 was not high. The
development of anti-Masonry, of course, brought about a further
decline in attendance.

THE INFLUENCE OF THE CHOLERA EPIDEMIC

Furthermore, in explaining the situation, especially in the
thirties, there was a factor that seems entirely to have escaped
the historians, and that was the prevalence of cholera in the
country. During the period beginning about 1830 the whole western
world was swept by an epidemic of cholera that brought death to
many and created a great fear among the people. It is impossible to
determine just how much effect this epidemic had in causing lodges
to die because the members feared to congregate. Nor can its
influence in causing nonrepresentation at the communications of the
Grand Lodges be determined. Conversely, it is impossible to think
that cholera did not have a harmful effect on the Institution,
aiding in producing conditions which have heretofore been
attributed to anti-Masonry alone.

Still another factor that must be given consideration was the
financial depression and panic which occurred during the period.
Whether due to the "removal of the deposits" from the Second Bank
of the United States or to manipulations of the Bank, the fact
remains that, beginning late in 1833 and extending into the spring
of 1834, there was a widespread depression. Then followed a few
years of "good times" characterized by an orgy of speculation. In
1837 a panic occurred which gripped the whole country. In some
localities its effects were felt well into the decade of the
forties. The resultant difficulty of securing money must be
recognized as a factor in aiding Masonry's decline and delaying its
recovery. Members could not pay their dues to local lodges, and
these lodges could not discharge their obligations to the Grand
Lodges.

THE EFFECT IN NEW YORK STATE

Since the Morgan affair occurred in western New York it is obvious
that the effects of the ensuing anti-Masonic excitement would first
be felt there. In New York the ground was well prepared before 1826
for the coming of anti-Masonry, as has been pointed out. (1) To
compare the small representation at the Grand Lodge communications
in the thirties with the representation in 1827 does not tell the
story, for 1827 was an unusual year in New York Masonic history. A
comparison with earlier years gives a more accurate view. An
examination of the Grand Lodge Proceedings as early as 1817 reveals
an unhealthy condition existing at that time in the Masonic
Institution in the state. There were 293 lodges on the list but of
these only 30 were represented at the annual communication on June
4, 1817. There were 10 lodges listed as having "Ceased to Work"
while 16 were listed under "Warrant Surrendered." There were listed
47 suspensions for non-payment of dues and 5 expulsions of
un-Masonic or immoral conduct. At least 17 warrants for new lodges
were issued during the year, indicating that even that early an
over-rapid expansion was taking place.

In 1818 only 28 lodges were represented, and it was apparent that
some action was necessary. Therefore in 1819, the "dead timber" was
eliminated and the lodges were renumbered. So rapidly had new lodge
been created that there still remained 323 on the list of which 82
were represented. By 1821 the lodges were again in a low state.
While 79 were represented, 179 others were reported as in arrears
for two years or more! In 1822 there were represented 110 lodges an
in 1823 there were 112 represented. In the latter year internal
dissensions came to a head and the Grand Lodge was split. The
result was the formation of a City Grand Lodge and a Country Grand
Lodge, whose rivalry in the following years was a factor of prime
importance in preparing the ground for anti-Masonry.

Each Grand Lodge tries to outdo the other in chartering new lodges
with the result that in some localities too many lodges were
created to be properly supported. Likewise, as a result, unworthy
candidates were admitted who were among the first to secede from
the Fraternity after the anti-Masonic excitement began. The Country
Grand Lodge, the stronger of the two, at its annual communication
in 1824, granted warrants for 30 new lodges. In the same year, at
its annual communication, the City Grand Lodge created 11 new
lodges. At the communications the following year the Country Grand
Lodge granted 46 new warrants while the City Grand Lodge granted
12.

Meanwhile efforts were being made to reunite the Grand Lodges with
the result that on June 7, 1827, they were merged. The interest
aroused in the proposed merger resulted in an extraordinarily large
representation, for at the communication of the merged Grand Lodges
there were present the representatives of 228 lodges. It is
significant that, at this merged communication, 14 petitions for
warrants for new lodges were granted. It is very evident from this
that anti-Masonry had not as yet affected the Masonic Institution.
Seemingly, Masonry in New York was, in 1827, at the peak of
prosperity, yet, it should be noted the a t there were 84 lodges
which had made no returns since 1822.

POLITICAL ENEMIES OF CRAFT

From the evidence presented it should be clear that anti-Masonry
alone did not bring about the decline in Masonic strength in New
York. There can be no question but that anti-Masonry, once
organized so as to combine religious fanatics and political
opportunists, such as Thurlow Weed, William H. Seward and Millard
Fillmore, exercised a devastating effect on the Fraternity, but it
is just as certain that the Masons of New York were, to some
extent, to blame for their own troubles.

By early 1828, it was apparent that the anti-Masonic movement was
having an effect on the Masonic Institution. In fact, from the time
of the beginning of the Morgan investigations and trials, there had
been public renunciations of Masonry by members in western New
York. A group of these gave encouragement to political anti-Masonry
by holding conventions at Le Roy on Feb. 19 and July 4, 1828.

THE EFFECT WITHIN THE FRATERNITY

The attendance at the Annual Communication of 1828 was only
slightly affected, as there were 130 lodges represented, as
compared with 142 represented in the two Grand Lodges in 1825.
However, during the year 1828 only 3 warrants for new lodges were
issued and these were the last for some years. There were 103
suspensions for non-payment of dues and 8 expulsions for un-Masonic
conduct as compared with 38 suspensions and 9 expulsions in the
combined lodges in 1825.

After 1828, the effects of anti-Masonry, on the individual Masons,
on the local lodges and on the Grand Lodge began to be more
apparent. Early in 1829 occurred the first organized movement
looking to the surrender of the local lodge charters. On Feb. 20,
a circular was issued by 76 Masons of Ontario County recommending
to the lodges and chapters of western New York "the expediency of
returning their charters." On March 13, six lodges of Monroe
County, including that at Rochester, surrendered their charters to
the Grand Lodge in "acquiescence to public opinion." However,
contrary to a rather general opinion, this example was not widely
followed. On May 5, 1829, delegates from 19 lodges in Cayuga and
Onondaga Counties held a meeting. Instead of adopting the course
taken by the Monroe County Masons, they drew up an address
disclaiming all knowledge of the Morgan affair prior to Morgan's
disappearance and denying all the charges made against the
Fraternity. They declared, "We venerate Masonry for its antiquity,
we admire it for its moral principles, and we love it for its
charity and benevolence." The following resolution was also
adopted:

Resolved, That in the opinion of this convention it would be
inexpedient and improper to take measures for the surrender of
Masonic charters, and that our brethren be respectfully advised to
adopt no measures in relation to that subject.

Similar action was taken by a convention of 114 delegates
representing 14 lodges and 5 Royal Arch Chapters of Chenango,
Cortland and Madison Counties, held Sept. 2, 1829. Complete figures
show that, during the whole period of the anti-Masonic excitement,
only 76 lodges, out of the 484 existent in 1825, surrendered their
charters.

Forty-three fewer lodges were represented at the 1829 Annual
Communication than were represented the previous year. The fact
that the dues of 23 lodges were remitted, shows that many Masons
were not paying their dues, though only 22 individuals were
reported during the year as suspended for that reason. It should be
noted in passing that in 1829 the anti-Masons made unsuccessful
attempts to secure the passage of laws by the New York legislature
forbidding "extra judicial oaths" and barring Masons from serving
on juries when one party in a case was a Mason and the other was
not.

THE GRAND LODGE VISITORS

In 1830 there was a further decline in the Grand Lodge
representation, as is shown by the accompanying chart. (2) At the
annual communication that year a system of Grand Lodge "Visitors"
for each county was inaugurated, it being the duty of each
"Visitor" to visit all the lodges in his district, to examine into
their condition and to receive the surrender of their charters,
jewels and other property if they wished to give them up. Action
was also taken to remit the dues of delinquent lodges under certain
prescribed conditions which had to be complied with by December,
1830, in order to prevent forfeiture of their charters.

At the 1831 session, the Grand Lodge hesitated to take drastic
action against delinquent lodges. It contented itself with passing
a resolution declaring that lodges which had not met for a year or
more should forfeit their warrants if they did not meet before
June, 1832. A resolution was also passed requiring lodges in
arrears for ten years or more to make returns by the time of the
next annual communication or forfeit their warrants.

In the June, 1832, communication of the Grand Lodge, the threatened
drastic action was taken. The warrants of 5 lodges were forfeited
because a "citation" of the last annual communication had not been
answered; 84 lodges which had made no returns since 1822 also had
their warrants forfeited. The Grand Secretary was likewise
instructed to demand the warrants of 23 lodges which had not met
for over a year. This form of procedure was also followed in later
communications so that, by 1836, no less than 338 lodges had had
their warrants forfeited by the Grand Lodge; 45 of these later
forfeitures occurred in 1833, 89 in 1834 and 92 in 1835. While this
drastic action cleared out the dead lodges, it was not without its
complications, for, out of all the warrants ostensibly surrendered
or forfeited, only 54 had been collected by the Grand Secretary in
1836. The scattering about of the old warrants presented excellent
opportunity for the development of clandestine Masonry and for a
time constituted a serious problem.

THE TURNING OF THE TIDE

So far as anti-Masonry was concerned, the year 1836 marked the
turning point for the Masonic Fraternity in New York. At the
communication in June of that year, the Grand Secretary, James
Herring, made a significant report in which he reviewed the events
of the past ten years. He called attention to the fact that
anti-Masonry in the state was rapidly dying out and that "the
revival of Masonic labors and usefulness begins to be manifest." As
concrete evidence of this there was presented the petition of Ark
Lodge, No. 160, to be restored, which petition was granted. Later
in the year two other lodges were revived.

In 1837 Masonry in New York was well on the road to recovery when
its progress was interrupted by another split in the Grand Lodge
growing out of an attempt to discipline certain Masons of New York
City for promoting a Masonic procession on St. John's Day (June 24,
1837) without authority. From this time on, the lack of prosperity
in the New York Grand Lodge cannot be blamed on anti-Masonry but
must be attributed chiefly to the strife among the Masons
themselves. However, the Panic of 1837 must not be overlooked as a
factor in hindering the recovery of Masonry in New York. But in
spite of these factors, additional lodges were restored, and in
1839 the first new lodge since 1828 was granted a warrant. By 1843
there were 93 lodges in the state and the number was increasing
rapidly.

In reviewing the anti-Masonic period in New York, several facts
stand out as especially interesting. Out of 53 counties in the
state, the lodges in 29 counties were entirely extinct in 1836,
either through surrender or forfeiture of warrants. Even in New
York County, where anti-Masonry made little headway politically,
only 22 out of 43 lodges were alive in 1836. Altogether, there were
at that time only 71 lodges left in the state, and 14 of these were
not in good standing. As a result of the decline in the lodges the
Grand Lodge resources dropped from $5,301 in 1827-1828 to $1,631 in
18351836. It is apparent that hundreds of Masons in the state, if
they did not openly secede, at least allowed their membership to
lapse. But many others dared to defy their persecutors and kept
many local lodges, as well as the Grand Lodge, alive and
functioning during the period. Great credit must be given to
General Morgan Lewis, a veteran of the Revolution, who was Grand
Master, 1830-1843, and to James Herring, the Grand Secretary,
1829-1845. The leadership of these two men during the period was of
inestimable benefit to the New York Masons.

ANTI-MASONRY IN VERMONT

From New York, as has been pointed out, (3) antiMasonry spread to
the neighboring states. In no state were its effects more
noticeable than in Vermont. By 1828 the excitement had produced
enough effect to reduce the Grand Lodge attendance from 52 in 1827
to 39 in 1828. When the annual communication was held at
Montpelier, in October, 1829, 40 out of the 68 lodges then under
charter were represented. In only 13 of them had there been any
initiations during the year.

At this communication two important things were done. One was to
elect Nathan B. Haswell of Burlington as Grand Master and Philip C.
Tucker of Vergennes as Deputy Grand Master. The former served
continuously until 1847 with Tucker as his Deputy and then was
succeeded by the latter. It was these two men who were chiefly
instrumental in bringing the Masonic Institution in Vermont through
the period of anti-Masonic persecution. The other important action
was to issue the famous "Appeal to the Inhabitants of Vermont . .
." This was a pamphlet of twelve pages, written by Philip C.
Tucker, and signed by those present at the communication. Two
thousand copies were printed and distributed. The "Appeal" traced
the development of the anti-Masonic movement, enumerated the
charges made against the Masonic Fraternity and then proceeded to
deny them in toto. Though the list of signers included many of the
most important men in the state, including Governor Samuel C.
Crafts and ex-Governor Martin Chittenden, not to mention numerous
others, it did not allay the spirit of persecution.

With the complete triumph of the political antiMasons in the state
elections of 1831, the condition of Freemasonry became more
critical. In the Grand Lodge, on Oct. 11 of that year, a resolution
was introduced to the dissolution of the Grand Lodge, but after a
heated debate the proposition was defeated by a vote of 99 to 19.
However, a recommendation was made to the lodges to hold only two
meetings each year, "one for good order and discipline and
instruction in Masonry, the other for the yearly choice of
officers."

THE POLITICAL FACTOR

The bitterness with which the presidential campaign of 1832 was
fought in Vermont was probably responsible for the decline in the
representation at the annual communication from 39 in 1831 to 10 in
1832. It was noised abroad that at the next session of the Grand
Lodge in 1833 another attempt would be made to secure its
dissolution. This resulted in 34 lodges being represented. On Oct.
9, 1833, a preamble and resolution calling for the surrender of the
local charters and the dissolution of the Grand Lodge was
introduced. Again there was heated debate but when the vote was
taken the resolution was defeated 79 to 42.

After the adjournment of the Grand Lodge, the Grand officers, on
Oct. 21, 1833, published an address to the people of the state.
They reviewed the history of Masonry in Vermont and pointed out
that of 73 charters issued since 1794, there were 68 still in
force. They charged that those who sought to secure the surrender
of charters were not animated by "an honest intention to pacify
public opinion," but had "far less honorable motives." They denied
that the Masonic Institution had interfered with politics or
religion, and closed by warning the people of the dangerous
precedent that would be established by the success of the movement
to exterminate Masonry.

Only 7 lodges were represented in 1834. The chief business
consisted of drawing up and adopting six resolutions, including a
reaffirmation of a resolution passed at the previous communication
giving lodges permission to surrender their charters, "a measure
calculated to relieve [those] who wished to retire from Masonry."
At this session the time of the annual communications was changed
from October to January, and, as a result, no meeting was held in
1835.

THE EMERGENCY MEASURES TAKEN BY GRAND LODGE

On Jan. 13, 1836, the Grand Lodge met at Burlington, with only nine
Grand officers present. These proceeded to elect officers and then
passed the following resolution:

Resolved, That the Grand Master, Grand Treasurer and Grand
Secretary, with such of the Grand Lodge as may make it convenient,
be and they are hereby authorized to attend at the hall of such
Lodge on the 2nd Wednesday of January, A. L. 5837 and adjourn said
Lodge to the 2nd Wednesday of January, A. L 5838, and thereafter
biennially.

This instruction was complied with, and the form of the Grand Lodge
organization was preserved until Jan. 14, 1846, when a convention
was held at Burlington on the invitation of Grand Master Haswell,
sent privately to trusted Masons in the state. Forty-three
delegates attended the meeting on the date set. After the
convention had considered the matter of reviving the Grand Lodge,
the meeting was dissolved, and the Grand Lodge was declared to be
opened, with ten lodges represented. With this beginning the
recovery of the Masonic Institution in Vermont proceeded slowly but
surely.

THE MOVEMENT IN NEW HAMPSHIRE

Up to 1829, anti-Masonry had hardly made itself felt in New
Hampshire. In fact, each year from 1826 to 1828 inclusive, new
lodges were chartered, so that the total number rose from 40 in
1825 to 52 in 1828. Three of these were listed in 1826 as being
extinct. However, in 1829, no new charters were issued. It was
reported to the Grand Lodge that some lodges had been seriously
affected by the anti-Masonic excitement. This was reflected in the
decreased representation at the annual session at Concord on June
9 and 10. Thereafter the attendance declined until in 1835 only 13
lodges were represented. No action in regard to delinquent lodges
was attempted until 1837. At the annual session of that year it was
resolved that the lodges should make returns and be represented at
the next annual communication or else forfeit their charters.

When the Grand Lodge met in 1838 it was not ready to enforce its
decree in relation to delinquent lodges. However, it did revoke one
charter while another was surrendered. In 1839 another charter was
surrendered. At the 1839 annual session it was reported that 26
lodges had made no returns for periods varying from six to eleven
years. But it was left to the 1840 annual session to take the
action threatened in 1837, for 26 lodges were declared to have
forfeited their charters. Having pruned the dead branches, the
Grand Lodge of New Hampshire proceeded on the road to recovery so
rapidly that by 1856 it had become stronger than ever before.

THE EFFECT PRODUCED IN MAINE

Up to 1829 there was no tangible evidence that Freemasonry in Maine
had been affected by anti-Masonry. Between 1825 and 1829 there were
ten new lodges chartered, raising the total from 48 in the first
mentioned year to 58 in 1829. At the annual communication at
Portland, Jan. 15, 1829, it was reported that three new charters
had been issued within the past year. However, at this
communication, the Grand Lodge representation was only 23 as
compared with 38 in 1828. Further evidence that anti-Masonry was
making itself felt is seen in the fact that 18 lodges were reported
to have "unsettled accounts" as compared with one so reported in
1827.

At the 1830 communication, official notice was for the first time
taken of anti-Masonry when a report was submitted by a committee on
"the subject of the peculiar duties of Masons at the present time."
The committee advised against the issuance of a public address for
the purpose of vindicating Masonry and urged Masons to "quietly let
the tempest take its course" endeavoring "to vindicate the
sincerity of their profession by a well-ordered life and
conversation."

ATTEMPTS TO STEM THE TIDE

In 1831 the Grand Lodge by-laws were amended so as to provide for
holding the annual communications at Augusta, in the hope that the
decline in representation would be halted. In this hope the Masons
of Maine were doomed to disappointment, for the representation
declined until in 1837 only the representatives of one lodge
together with the Grand officers were present at the annual
communication on Jan. 19. At this session the charter of one lodge
was declared forfeited. But the lowest point of Masonic activity in
Maine had not yet been reached. When the time arrived for the
annual communication on Jan. 20, 1842, not one lodge was
represented. Neither was the Grand Master present, so the various
Grand offices with the exception of that of Grand Secretary were
filled by Grand officers pro tem.

It was not until 1844 that Freemasonry in Maine may be said to have
definitely started on the up-grade. At the annual communication at
Augusta on Jan. 18 there were represented 19 lodges. Among these
were one which had surrendered its charter in 1836 and the one
whose charter had been forfeited in 1837. As the representatives of
both were allowed to vote this amounted to virtual restoration,
though formal restoration did not take place until later. It was
decided to again hold the annual communications at Portland Action
was also taken to restore such lodges as desired it. Thereafter,
satisfactory progress toward complete recovery was made, though
quite slowly at first. When the Grand Lodge, on July 4, 1845, broke
the ground for the "Atlantic and St. Lawrence Railroad," it was
evident that the spirit of persecution in Maine had melted away.

NOTES

(1) J. Hugo Tatsch, THE BUILDER, August, 1926. 
(2) This chart will appear at the conclusion of the article.
(3) Erik McKinley Eriksson, THE BUILDER, December, 1926.

(To be continued)

AN ANTI-MASON ON MASONRY

The Rev. David Barnard thus expressed himself in 1847 in a letter
to a religious periodical of the day:

Masonry is a harlot. For the Bible and the Shaster, Christ and the
Koran, are equally indifferent to her. Masonry does teach and bind
by solemn oath and under awful penalties to keep secret both murder
and treason.

Further on he propounded the following theses on the subject, which
he undertook to defend and prove: "That Freemasonry is profane and
blasphemous; that Freemasonry conflicts with the laws of both God
and man, and is in its principles and practice murderous; that
Freemasonry is Deism, and its secret and avowed purpose the
destruction of religion."

